Question

In: Economics

The steeper the marginal abatement cost function, the more a firm will reduce emissions in response...

The steeper the marginal abatement cost function, the more a firm will reduce emissions in response to a given emission tax.

a.True

b.False

A two-part emission charge

a.would implement a high initial emission charge, then a lower charge for higher levels

b.is implemented when flat charges don’t reduce emission sufficiently

c.may allow a certain level of emissions to go untaxed then taxes emissions above that

d.both of the first two answers are correct

Under an emission charge system, firms will increase abatement as long a the emission charge is greater than the marginal abatement cost.

a.True

b.False

When marginal abatement costs differ across firms, an emissions tax will always achieve a given level of abatement at a lower total abatement cost than a proportionate cutback by all firms.

a.True

b.False

The complication of nonuniform emissions can be addressed by

a.equiproportionate cutbacks in emissions

b.a uniform emissions charge since that would be cost effective

c.zoned emission charges

d.cannot be effectively addressed with emissions charges

One disadvantage of an emissions tax system relative to an emission standard is that the response by firms to the tax, and hence the overall reduction in emissions, is usually not well know in advance of implementing the program.

a.True

b.False

Solutions

Expert Solution

This is false because the steeper the marginal abatement cost function, the less will emission be reduced in response to a tax.

A two part emission charge would implement a high initial emission charge, then a lower charge for high for higher levels and is implemented when flat charges don't reduce emission sufficiently.

This is true that under an emissiom charge system, firm will increase abatement as long the emission charge is greater than the marginal abatement cost.

This is true that when marginal cost abatement differs across firms, an emissiom tax will always achieve a given level of abatement at a lower total abatement cost than a proportionate cutback by all firms.

The complication of non uniform emission can not be effectively addresa with emission charges.

This is true that an emission tax system relative to an emission standard is that the response by firms to the tax, and hence the overall reduction in emissions is usually is not well know in advance of implementing the program.


Related Solutions

Firm A Firm B Emissions Total abatement costs Marginal abatement costs Emissions Total abatement costs Marginal...
Firm A Firm B Emissions Total abatement costs Marginal abatement costs Emissions Total abatement costs Marginal abatement costs 4 0 0 4 0 0 3 1 1 3 2 2 2 3 2 2 6 4 1 6 3 1 12 6 0 10 4 0 20 8 1. What are the total abatement costs for the firms and economy to reduce 50% of the emissions with command and control policies? 2. How will cap and trade improve the situation,...
Assume that the marginal abatement cost curves (MACs) are linear and that the firm currently faces...
Assume that the marginal abatement cost curves (MACs) are linear and that the firm currently faces a standard imposed at the optimal level of pollution. Suppose a new technology can be adopted at zero cost, which causes the MAC to swing downwards. Also, assume that if the firm adopts the technology, the regulator automatically adjusts the standard to its new optimal level. Under what conditions will the firm adopt the new technology?
Imagine a firm’s marginal abatement cost function with existing technologies is: MAC = 8 – E....
Imagine a firm’s marginal abatement cost function with existing technologies is: MAC = 8 – E. If the firm adopts new pollution abatement technologies, its marginal abatement cost function will be: MAC = 4 – 0.5E. With a tax on emissions of $2, the benefits of adopting the new technologies equal: Select one: a. $4. b. $10. c. $2. d. $8.
There are two firms, firm A and firm B. Their marginal abatement costs are MCA =...
There are two firms, firm A and firm B. Their marginal abatement costs are MCA = 4AA and MCB = AB, where AA and AB are the tons of emissions abated by firm A and B, respectively. a. Calculate the total cost if each firm is required to abate 50 tons of emissions. b. Would this policy be cost effective and why? c. What if the government set the total abatement to be 100 tons with tradable allowances, what is...
If marginal cost exceeds marginal revenue, the firm A)should reduce its average fixed cost in order...
If marginal cost exceeds marginal revenue, the firm A)should reduce its average fixed cost in order to lower its marginal cost. B)may still be earning a positive accounting profit C)should increase the level of production to maximize its profit. D)is most likely to be at a profit-maximizing level of output. Who is a price taker in a competitive market? A)both buyers and sellers B)buyers only C)sellers only D)neither buyers nor sellers For a competitive firm, A)total cost equals marginal revenue....
What must be true about the relationship between marginal abatement cost and marginal damage cost to...
What must be true about the relationship between marginal abatement cost and marginal damage cost to achieve the efficient level of pollution? While the efficient level can be defined in principle, why might policy instruments to obtain the efficient level be difficult to implement in practice?
For the following questions assume: Marginal Abatement Cost is MAC= 12 – E, and Marginal Damages...
For the following questions assume: Marginal Abatement Cost is MAC= 12 – E, and Marginal Damages is MD = E/2 Suppose the same polluter is operating under a regulatory environment such that the polluter always choses ESE (so the regulation updates as polluters innovate). The firm has the option of undertaking a technological innovation in abatement such that it would face MAC = 6 – E/2 after implementation. 9) What is the incentive to innovate (the net private benefit to...
Let us assume the following regarding 2 firms: Firm A Firm B Emissions Total abatement costs...
Let us assume the following regarding 2 firms: Firm A Firm B Emissions Total abatement costs Marginal abatement costs Emissions Total abatement costs Marginal abatement costs 4 0 0 4 0 0 3 1 3 2 2 2 2 4 1 3 1 6 0 4 0 8 1 Please calculate the total abatement costs for both firms (see empty boxes in the table above, what are the corresponding values?) 2 What are the total abatement costs for the firms...
Q1) The government seeks to reduce the emissions of gunk through a tax. The marginal benefits...
Q1) The government seeks to reduce the emissions of gunk through a tax. The marginal benefits of reducing gunk emissions are: MB = 30 – 1/3 Q Two firms emit gunk from their factories. The marginal costs of reducing emission of gunk for firms one and two are the following: MC1 = 4q1 and MC2 = 2q2 where q1 and q2 are, respectively, the amount of emissions reduced by the first and second firms. a) What are the total industry...
1. Two firms can reduce pollution at the following marginal abatement costs: MC1 = 12Q1 MC2...
1. Two firms can reduce pollution at the following marginal abatement costs: MC1 = 12Q1 MC2 = 4Q2 where Qi is the abatement (pollution control) of firm i = 1, 2. In the absence of regulation, each firm would emit 40 units of emissions. Assume that each firm’s objective is to minimize its compliance costs (c) The aggregate marginal cost function for this two-firm industry is: MC = 3Q Suppose the marginal benefit of pollution control is given by: MB...
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT